California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Bookasta, 136 Cal.App.3d 296, 186 Cal.Rptr. 193 (Cal. App. 1982):
Defendant made no payments toward the order of restitution until after probation had been revoked and he had been arrested pursuant to the bench warrant. A relative made the payment in full on the date defendant was remanded to custody awaiting a probation violation hearing. Furthermore, one of the two checks used to make the payment was postdated. Defendant's contention is without merit that no violation occurred because the full amount of restitution was paid. He ignores [136 Cal.App.3d 301] the fact that the court had ordered restitution paid through the probation officer in such amount and manner as prescribed by the probation officer. The probation officer established a monthly payment schedule with which defendant totally failed to comply for a period of more than 15 months. Defendant was also ordered to obey all orders, rules and regulations of the probation department. The probation officer established a monthly reporting period with which defendant complied for only the first two months. Where a defendant fails to comply with conditions of probation a court does not abuse its discretion in revoking the order granting probation and taking further action. (People v. McClean, supra, 130 Cal.App.2d 439, 445, 279 P.2d 87.) The trial court manifestly was justified in finding defendant in violation of probation.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.